RELIEF FUNDS

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVII, Issue 19804, 21 May 1934, Page 6

RELIEF FUNDS

PROPOSED APPEAL TO CHILDREN EDUCATION BOARD NOT IN FAVOUR The Canterbury Education Board, at its meeting on Friday, refused to give approval to a circular letter which the Canterbury Progress League, in organising the raising of money for the relief of distress in Christchurch, desired to send to each headmaster or chairman of a school committee. The letter from the Canterbury Progress League informed the Board that the League had undertaken to organise the appeal for funds for relief of distress this winter in the city. The system of dispensing relief had undergone a complete overhaul, and the public could now be assured that funds contributed would be completely administered. The sympathy of the Board was sought in a special appeal to children, through the schools in the metropolitan area. It was suggested that the following letter to headmasters and chairmen of school committees be approved by the Board: —“From evidence in the possession of the committee collecting funds for the relief of distress in the city and suburbs it is certain that the conditions this winter will demand even more help than that received previously. The situation is urgent. It is felt that many school children will desire to make some small sacrifice to assist those in less fortunate circumstances without appealing to their parents. It is supposed, therefore, to invite small cash gifts from those in a position to give, and at the same time it is urged that incapacity to contribute should be recognised by all, so that those who cannot afford to give anything may not feel that they are placed in an invidious'position. It is recognised that in many instances of both schools and individuals, the contributions may be small, but the relief committee desires to stress the point that even the smallest sums will prove of great assistance. The committee feels that you will realise the urgency of the situation and do veur best to give effect to their request.” Mr C. S. Thompson moved that permission be granted to the Progress League to write to the school committees and headmasters, as suggested. Tlie motion was opposed by Mr J. W. Preen, who said he did not favour any such scheme being extended to schools. The committees were already doing all in their power to alleviate distress in individual districts. It was not right to allow propaganda from the League to be sent through schools. Mr Thompson: We must allow the committees and headmasters the right to adopt the proposal of the League or not. Mr S. Baird: I am bitterly opposed to this suggestion. There is too much exploiting of children. Mr H. J. Bignell was also opposed to the Leaghe’s scheme. “It may be very well to allow the letters to be sent,” he said, “but we should say that we do not approve of the scheme.”

The chairman, Mr W. P. Spencer, said he thought that school committees were doing their utmost at present.

The secretary, Mr Charles Kirk, explained that there was no regulation which prevented the League sending the circular letter to headmasters and chairmen of committees. It could do it independently.

Mr Thompson’s motion was lost by six votes to four and there was no further discussion.